Industrial civilisation headed for 'irreversible collapse'

momj47(7A)March 18, 2014

Are we going to follow Rome?

A new study sponsored by Nasa's Goddard Space Flight Center has highlighted the prospect that global industrial civilisation could collapse in coming decades due to unsustainable resource exploitation and increasingly unequal wealth distribution.

Noting that warnings of 'collapse' are often seen to be fringe or controversial, the study attempts to make sense of compelling historical data showing that "the process of rise-and-collapse is actually a recurrent cycle found throughout history." Cases of severe civilisational disruption due to "precipitous collapse - often lasting centuries - have been quite common."

............the most salient interrelated factors which explain civilisational decline, and which may help determine the risk of collapse today: namely, Population, Climate, Water, Agriculture, and Energy.

These factors can lead to collapse when they converge to generate two crucial social features: "the stretching of resources due to the strain placed on the ecological carrying capacity"; and "the economic stratification of society into Elites [rich] and Masses (or "Commoners") [poor]" These social phenomena have played "a central role in the character or in the process of the collapse," in all such cases over "the last five thousand years."

The difference today is the power of major conglomerates, such as energy, that exist around the world that are dictating the policies of many countries. Thus, political leaders are puppets in the hands of this interest group and others. The efforts of NED show that we have been at this a long time and our country is in serious distress for it...

Although this is a global evaluation, looking just at the most advanced societies today compared to those that collapsed before, a big difference I see is representative government--the ability of the "masses," i.e., us, to just finally say no and thus avert total collapse, even if decline might be unavoidable at a point when much of the planet was in crisis.

Given the schism in U.S. society, with the determination of one half to foil action by the other at all costs, I have wondered if it would be possible for our society to react to a combination of major crisis and subversive leaders by voting an end to our representative form of government. This did occur as a right-wing movement in Germany, and many are tolerating and even supporting informal movement that direction now, accepting the transfer of their power and national possessions to the very wealthy that is leading to extreme inequality.

Lacking a previous breakdown of democracy, though, it's hard to imagine us reaching the stage of mass famine before reversing course in our country.

The depletion of resource I'm guessing WILL be most threatening to our nation all by itself is fresh water. We're using it up at an alarming rate.

“We have about five more years at the outside to do something.”
• Kenneth Watt, ecologist

“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”
• George Wald, Harvard Biologist

“We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation.”
• Barry Commoner, Washington University biologist

“Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.”
• New York Times editorial

“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

“Some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions.
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

“It is already too late to avoid mass starvation.”
• Denis Hayes

“Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”
• Peter Gunter, professor, North Texas State University

“Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”
• Life Magazine, January 1970

“At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

Stanford's Paul Ehrlich announces that the sky is falling.
“Air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.”
• Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist

“We are prospecting for the very last of our resources and using up the nonrenewable things many times faster than we are finding new ones.”
• Martin Litton, Sierra Club director

“By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’”
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

“Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”
• Sen. Gaylord Nelson

“The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”
• Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

Keep these predictions in mind when you hear the same predictions made today. They’ve been making the same predictions for 44 years. And they’re going to continue making them until…well…forever.

Here we are, 44 years later and the economy sucks, but the ecology’s fine. In fact this planet is doing a lot better than the planet on which those green lunatics live.

The mass starvation in India and other Asian areas predicted by Paul Ehrlich was staved off by development of a new, far more productive strain of wheat.

However, it is now looking as if that was a temporary fix and new miracles will be needed to stave off mass starvation. Very unfortunately, that new strain requires far more water to grow.

Buildup of ingredients in the water provided by dams and canals to farm regions to grow that and other food products is now destroying those farmlands. Millions of acres of farm land have already been lost to poisoned soil. Of course, the land that used to get that water went arid and was lost long ago.

Just saying. This is one example of giant problems building all over the planet. We ARE in trouble. We are not lost, but we must act.

In both scenarios, Elite wealth monopolies mean that they are buffered from the most "detrimental effects of the environmental collapse until much later than the Commoners", allowing them to "continue 'business as usual' despite the impending catastrophe." The same mechanism, they argue, could explain how "historical collapses were allowed to occur by elites who appear to be oblivious to the catastrophic trajectory (most clearly apparent in the Roman and Mayan cases)."

"While some members of society might raise the alarm that the system is moving towards an impending collapse and therefore advocate structural changes to society in order to avoid it, Elites and their supporters, who opposed making these changes, could point to the long sustainable trajectory 'so far' in support of doing nothing."

Like evolution and global climate change. Many things happen whether we believe, or don't believe.

Elites, as always and by definition, are in control. No paradigm shifts will happen by design because they will adversely affect elites even more than 'common' folk.

An example: the sane course of action for Congress would be to ban hydraulic fracturing in the US (as is happening in some other nations). It won't happen here because investors in fracking interests have the cellphone numbers of important members of Congress. When people have large incomes based on stuff like fracking and offshore drilling they can't think straight, nor can they if such people are their top campaign donors. The fact that little people would suffer higher fuel prices if fracking were banned is a non-factor.

The reason I don't post much on this and other subjects on HT is exemplified by our VT cousin's profound ignorance about the state of the earth's ecology and those in his peanut gallery applauding in support.

Chicken Little Lives, indeed.

GMOs are clones by design and construct. Monocropping cloned plants will be a disaster waiting to happen.

Brushworks, I don't doubt that we're busy pulling off little miracles all the time, including with GMOs, but I was talking about resources and environment--the land we need to grow GMOs.

Another problem that happened in India and Pakistan is that lands where rivers were diverted became too waterlogged, so not only are major regions of farmlands being abandoned, but disasters such as the 2010 Pakistan Indus flood are able to occur. That flood that covered much of Pakistan was not mostly from natural causes but occurred during monsoon rains from cascading failures of dam and levee projects whose problems developed toward this disaster over decades. Including vast areas of water-soaked land that couldn't absorb the rains.

This same thing is happening in many countries. In ours, some of the over 75,000 dams we built so hopefully and were a great boon for some regions for a while really need to be taken down because destructive effects we didn't foresee are now outweighing their benefits. Especially some larger ones. Most are nearing end-of-life anyway, which should make the expensive proposition of removing many of them versus rebuilding more viable.

Anyway, articles like this are premised on a continuation without change. That's hardly likely, though, since problems tend to create change. I'm just channeling those who say we really need to get going -- like 35 years ago preferably.

Marshall, some people just cannot understand that there were some genuine crackpots in 1970. All that post did was point out some of the nuts.

Oil was supposed to run out. But we now have more proven oil fields today than in 1970.

All these species were going to be extinct. Yes, some species goes extinct every day and will until the end of time. Nothing is supposed to be here forever, including us.

The earth is doing just fine, thank you. besides, there's nothing we can do unless the ENTIRE WORLD gets on board. And nobody here wants India or China to do anything. Just the USA. And if you believe we are the only ones destroying the planet, I have a bridge to nowhere to sell you.

Marshall, Rosie, et al, just what are YOU people personally doing to save the planet? Do you drive a car? Do you burn fossil fuels? Do you have air conditioning in your home? Does your computer have plastic components? I sure hope not.

Don't talk the talk unless you walk the walk. Even Algore rides around in a private Lear Jet and owns beachfront property. Because he made $100 million scaring people.

Pointing out flaws in societal and governmental systems is not comparable to criticizing individuals. When Jesus said let he who is without sin cast stones, he wasn't talking about questioning authority.

There goes Christopher again--trying to stir up a squabble just for the sake of having a squabble.

Christopher, don't waste your time on Marshall. He isn't going to rise to your baiting. However, if you ever want to have a serious, knowledgeable discussion of the topic, Marshall would be your man--if you could convince him you were serious, that is.

Christopher, I haven't saved the world, and I could always do more. A lot more, but that would require actually substantially changing our lifestyle. I still use foils and plastic wraps. Environmental ideologues certainly would not be at all impressed with us, including our large heavily windowed house that does not include expensive, nonstandard, environmentally advanced systems, like solar. Nevertheless, since you ask, let's see,

Well, due to my early California conditioning/traumatization, I have been turning the faucet on just enough and turning it off again immediately for close to 40 years. This leaps to mind because I keep, oh, so casually, turning off faucets left running off in other peoples' houses.

We have NEVER purchased bottled water, preferring to insist our community provide good drinking water instead.

We don't wash clothes if they're not actually dirty (less common than you might think) and fill the dishwasher before running.

We hold onto possessions, very little unnecessary turnover, and I actually prefer to purchase old, used and antique items in many cases, such as furniture. We've actually never purchased a new car and seldom a new appliance. (The markup always drove us away, or friends were trying to unload something).

I haven't overwatered my garden for just as long. I've always confined water-loving plants to small, appropriate areas and otherwise used plants that could fend for themselves without additional watering.

I have always minimized use of chemicals outside, and it IS very minimal. Here in the South, where nature is always attempting to take over, I do love my glyphosate a bit too much, though. (I have 3 ridiculous scratches on my nose right now from trying to battle brambles by hand.)

I plant food and shelter for animals and have started allowing trees to grow over more of our open space. We let our little pasture grow long for grazing and shelter (between cutting it to keep ourselves from being overwhelmed with plagues of insects).

For lawn I planted a low-growing, low-water-need grass that goes brown and only greens up well after the spring shows starts, instead of the evergreen fescue I wanted. It has to be hurting before I allow it a little water in the middle of summer.

Most natural debris is broken up and tucked under shrubs or tossed into the woods. On a smaller property we composted everything for decades. Still have my grinder, but don't use (so points for less fuel there).

We used to drive a lot, but these days I bundle my errands and limit running around for fun, which is usually done with family or friends anyway. Regrettably, we don't travel much, but that's for budget reasons; still, it does reduce our carbon footprint.

Same for our reduced consumption of goods since DH retired, mostly involuntary due to reduced income, but still a reduced footprint.

Fairly lately we've started eating far less meat in our meals, choosing seasonal produce, and eating more locally produced produce when available.

DH does a lot more kayak fishing, cutting his boat motor use on the lake. He no longer has an an ocean boat.

In cold weather we turn the heater off at night, or down to 60, and in all but the really cold weather just wear warm clothes when we get up until the sun hitting the long east side of the house warms it up.

We installed an outrageously expensive EPA-approved wood burning furnace, with heat distribution system, because we always have a tree dying here and there and wanted to be able to burn them for fuel. Especially nice in January and February when temperatures drop to the teens and single digits.

When weather permits, windows are open all day and night.

I have heat intolerance because of my disorder, so when the Southern heat hits about 82 degrees with the typical soupy summer humidity I do close the house and turn the AC on.

The sun lights our house when it's up. DH keeps turning off the lights to just what we need, and I only occasionally turn more on when he's left on gloomy days.

I always let people know when the subject comes up that, yes, I'm afraid I'm one of THOSE people who believe all those climate-change lies. I don't go into details, just let them know that there are real people right here in the south who are very worried about what's happening and is going to happen.

I religiously vote against environmentally irresponsible scoundrels and idiots, which here in our part of the rural South almost without fail means the Republican front runners for every office.

While I encourage all individuals to be more environmentally-concerned and do what they can in their houses and back yard gardens, the simple fact is that reforming all the individual backyard gardens in the world is not going to make any real difference in the overall fate of the globe.

The problem is so much larger than that that it long ago went zooming way beyond individual efforts.

Reforming agri-business/BIG BUSINESS--now there we might find some meaningful change that could affect our future.

I can sit here and look out my window and see nothing but wildlife and trees.

A hundred years ago, I'd be sitting here and lucky to see anything but tree stumps and a smokey haze from the charcoal making for the local iron smelting.

If I lived in NYC a couple hundred years ago, I'd be breathing coal smoke and walking ankle deep in horse manure.

If I lived a few thousand years ago, I'd huddle around a polluting fire inside a cave. Maybe live in a tent with a hole in the top to move the smoke outside.

Snort, indeed.

"Marshall, Rosie, et al, just what are YOU people personally doing to save the planet? Do you drive a car? Do you burn fossil fuels? Do you have air conditioning in your home? Does your computer have plastic components?"

And how many kids do you have to face this terrible world you envision?

Snort, indeed.

"Christopher, don't waste your time on Marshall. He isn't going to rise to your baiting. However, if you ever want to have a serious, knowledgeable discussion of the topic, Marshall would be your man--if you could convince him you were serious, that is. "

How absurd to think an individual can make huge changes but as a collection of many we can.

I do not buy bottled water, buy as much as I can in recyclable containers, or no containers, always bring my own bags to the grocery store, diligently recycle or reuse, use only all natural products in my gardens and lots more little things...it all adds up and is the best one person can do.

It's always more helpful to view the bigger picture, as it were... than to think small.

This doesn't mean that our individual efforts are a waste of time, though. The more effort we put into living a less wasteful lifestyle, and the more this kind of ecological thinking spreads, the better our chances that our smaller demands for a healthier planet will be heard by those who CAN act on a bigger scale.

All we need is a bigger majority of the population demanding positive change.

It never hurts to tend to our own devices regarding reducing, recycling, reusing, etc. even if it's a feel good effort about our own infinitesimal fraction of the planet.

A vast majority would go for positive change, and most likely do - it's the getting of someone in a position to actually do something positive and truly meaningful that is the perennial stumbling block.

Im sorry you were driven out Marshall - too many times you made a thread worth reading. I have always considered you to be a top shelf forum member when you were more active.

Im not around much anymore either. Even the bright, educated and knowledgeable cant really save many threads anymore these days.
What happened to this forum? It bears little to no resemblance to the forum I joined years ago. If it werent for a handful, I wouldnt bother anymore.

I believe KT was feeling as you do when he left for good, this forum lost a truly great member when he quit.

It's a shame that most of the truly pertinent threads end up dropping off the page while those of a more politically divisive, trivial "gotcha" nature reach 150 or more posts in no time flat. It's not a wonder that some of our more information-ally articulate members have left seeking greener pastures... or perhaps quieter, or more serious pastures in which to really discuss the more relevant issues of the day.

"A vast majority would go for positive change, and most likely do - it's the getting of someone in a position to actually do something positive and truly meaningful that is the perennial stumbling block."

From what I've been reading lately, there's a decided effort, or movement, by many young people... and also those of retirement age... to rethink their way of life and what society dictates as "the norm". Quite a few people are dropping out of that traditional norm and reaching toward more sustainable, more self-reliant, more minimalist, greener way of life.

In my opinion, this is a very good thing.

More and more people are spending less on housing and material possessions, and getting more into spending time working for themselves, or within small eco-communities, to create a life that's in tune with Mother Nature and the betterment of our planet.

The next step is to vote in representatives that can think outside of the box marked "socially normal dictates".

It must occur that not everyone has the same level of expertise and interest - mounting a reasoned treatise on many topics to keep a discussion going beyond the first handful of knowledgeables isn't always possible. With the right tools, even BS can be spread out pretty thinly.

Well, on the plus side, we humans in ourselves are net neutral on carbon emissions. :)

As was pointed out by the lawyer arguing for the EPA when answering a question by Justice Roberts whether the Clean Air Act standards were so tightly written that they could affect high school football games.

Bizarrely, as the Clean Air Act can be interpreted to cover even schools and small businesses, attempting to make it more workable, the EPA set new, less stringent standards for compliance. Various red states and industry groups brought suit arguing presidential overreach by altering the standards set by congressional statute, effectively fighting for HIGHER standards.

This case is more fun to muse about than notable for importance to the amateur. Does one or do two provisions of the act allow the executive branch to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources like power plants?

Notably, though, the Clean Air Act itself is in no danger, and the Supreme Court used this opportunity to affirm that "greenhouse gases present an URGENT THREAT..."

"A new study sponsored by Nasa's Goddard Space Flight Center has highlighted the prospect that global industrial civilisation could collapse in coming decades due to unsustainable resource exploitation and increasingly unequal wealth distribution."

Some historians suspect that what we are seeing is the end of the Great Divergence, where the West (Europe, North America, Australasia) had catapulted past the rest of the world and developed by leaps and bounds. Now the rest of the world is starting to catch up and they are industriously (heh) and enthusiastically engaging in the process.

I tend to agree that the Great Divergence is ending. Anyone can adopt the pillars - or the "killer apps", as Niall Ferguson calls them - of growth, civilization, and advancement. And other parts of the world are doing just that, or at least starting to do that.

So, as the west becomes ossified and complacent, others are adopting the philosophies and techniques that allow them to move forward. This is particularly true of Asians, but it could be anyone because those killer apps are open source.

Most Asians work more hours than most people in the West, especially Europe, and they are starting to produce more. These days, more patents are coming from Asia than from the West. In other words, we have a level of competition where there was none before. Get used to it.

Competition is good because it indicates who/what is fit enough to adapt and move forward. It also drives you to step up your game.

I really don't much care about income distribution. It's much ado about nothing. It's meaningless and irrelevant that some people make gobs more money than others, because there is no limited pot from which they acquire their wealth. It's not like they are taking earnings away from someone else. Any creative, driven person can, at any time, increase their earnings if they have a great idea or a good product or create a service that everyone wants.

I would worry if people in the middle lose a lot of purchasing power and if they were restricted from advancement by stupid policies, rather than their own limitations. But they are better off than pretty much ever, even just 1 or 2 generations ago. I would also be more concerned if people, with a bit of effort and some native intelligence, couldn't punch through to increased earnings.

Now the world is in the middle of a big change, largely technology driven. It has changed the way we do business. We have to adapt.

"Noting that warnings of 'collapse' are often seen to be fringe or controversial, the study attempts to make sense of compelling historical data showing that "the process of rise-and-collapse is actually a recurrent cycle found throughout history." Cases of severe civilisational disruption due to "precipitous collapse - often lasting centuries - have been quite common."

Well, they *are* fringe warnings. While I'm a big fan of The Walking Dead, I suffer no delusions that a zombie apocalypse is imminent, or any other apocalypse for that matter. Generally, employing apocalyptic warnings are methods used to bolster an ideology and advance an agenda. I'm flatly unimpressed with dire warnings of catastrophes because they almost never pan out and have to be modified and toned down when hindsight is applied.

So, "collapse" is kind of a silly word to use to describe the changes. It is just change after all. We've been through it before. Thousands of times. It's what we do.

"I really don't much care about income distribution. It's much ado about nothing. It's meaningless and irrelevant that some people make gobs more money than others, because there is no limited pot from which they acquire their wealth. It's not like they are taking earnings away from someone else. Any creative, driven person can, at any time, increase their earnings if they have a great idea or a good product or create a service that everyone wants."

Most of which, I'd be willing to bet are international patents on ripped-off Western designs. The entire Taiwanese tool industry is based on that. Fly-by-night corporate fronts and distributors that hide behind importer-exporter status instead of as manufacturers complete the picture.

But hey, seems fair enough in compensation for the flat-out looting of the raw resources of several continents, doesn't it?

PNBrown, truly...amazing take, and apparently amazing self discipline. You must have to maintain a constant vigilance to be able to sustain that particular picture.

I'm with you, Hay.

However, turns out the paper described in this thread has already been thoroughly debunked by other scholars. NASA had nothing to do with it. The "journalist" who first styled the study in an inaccurate article is a conspiracist, apparently including a 9/11 "truther," and from there it caught fire.

About the study itself, from Joseph Tainter, author of “The Collapse of Complex Societies” who it actually quotes as a source:

"Overall I found the paper to be trivial and deeply flawed. It is amazing that anyone would take it seriously, but clearly some people do (at least in the media).

You are correct that they cite my work a lot, but they seem not to have been influenced by it, or even to understand it." ...

"It is interesting how collapse theories mirror broader societal issues. During the Cold War, we had theories ascribing collapse to elite mismanagement, class conflict, and peasant revolts. As global warming became a public issue, scholars of the past began to discover that ancient societies collapsed due to climate change. As we have become concerned about sustainability and resource use today, we have learned that ancient societies collapsed due to depletion of critical resources, such as soil and forests. Now that inequality and “the 1%” are topics of public discourse, we have this paper focusing largely on elite resource consumption. ...

The paper has many flaws. The first is that “collapse” is not defined [as Lionheart's imagining of collapse as life as usual illustrates], and the examples given conflate different processes and outcomes. Thus the authors are not even clear what topic they are addressing. ...

Contrary to the authors’ unsubstantiated assertion, there is no evidence that elite consumption caused ancient societies to collapse. The authors simply have no empirical basis for this assumption, and that point alone undercuts most of the paper. ... In other words, there is no empirical or substantiated theoretical basis for this paper’s model."

Lionheart: "Generally, employing apocalyptic warnings are methods used to bolster an ideology and advance an agenda. I'm flatly unimpressed with dire warnings of catastrophes because they almost never pan out and have to be modified and toned down when hindsight is applied.

So, "collapse" is kind of a silly word to use to describe the changes. It is just change after all. We've been through it before. Thousands of times. It's what we do."

Yup, good summary IMO.

Rosie: "I'm with you, Hay.

However, turns out the paper described in this thread has already been thoroughly debunked by other scholars. NASA had nothing to do with it. The "journalist" who first styled the study in an inaccurate article is a conspiracist, apparently including a 9/11 "truther," and from there it caught fire."

Thank you for doing the research, Rosie. I was thinking along the lines of what vgkg said: "Wash, Rinse, Repeat..."

Thanks for the heads-up, Brasstacks. This sort of statement just tickles me:

“The most significant thing about this partnership is that Podesta will help advocate the idea that you can have economic recovery and growth without sacrificing the environment,” said Elgie Holstein, strategic director for the Environmental Defense Fund and a former colleague of Podesta in the Clinton administration."

I note that Podesta was involved in the Roadless Initiative, which is a real mess, especially as it regards access to our (public) federal forests for many of our physically disabled citizens.

Some, like asteroids and Yellowstone blowing to smithereens are so remote and there's not really much I can do to avoid risks like that.

To the extent, (very limited extent), that I "worry" and "prepare" about disaster, it is usually about some terrible disease emerging that sweeps our very connected world. MERS, SARS or some other virus. There's a big news item about the Ebola virus showing up in Guinea now.

IF there is indeed going to be global warming disasters, food will likely be a problem. Areas that, before, were our "breadbaskets" may very well change dramatically and quickly and, I'd expect, unpredictably.

And, I know it's not shared by many of you here, but, I'm convinced, as you all know, that Socialism in all its manifestations, as has happened repeatedly in our recent history, poses a very real threat to our well being. Those unintended consequences.

'Christopher, don't waste your time on Marshall. He isn't going to rise to your baiting. However, if you ever want to have a serious, knowledgeable discussion of the topic, Marshall would be your man..."

Snort, indeed.

"Im sorry you were driven out Marshall - too many times you made a thread worth reading. I have always considered you to be a top shelf forum member when you were more active."

More like a shelf liner if you ask me.

Marshall, when we make it to Vegas, you can teach me the turkey trot. OK? That's a new one for me.

hay, I always read your posts - some are provoking of thought, some are irritating, and some are just time wasters.
I have never been dismissive of any of them like you just were to Marshalls'. As far as I recall, that was a 1st for you. Marshall is one of several that I have great respect for.

Between climate change and pollution of our everyday needs (ref. Duke Power and drinking water thread), some things need to be addressed. Can't dance them all away.

1st? Have you not been paying attention? I've been insulting Marshall for pretty close to ten years now.

Some day we're going to go to Vegas and win a lot of money, carouse with some beautiful, high kicking Follies and Marshall's going to teach us all how to Turkey trot.
You're welcome to come along if you want.

Yeah! I've put myself up as an object against which hayoff gets off trying to insult me. Really. The real insult is that he is SO inept at trying to insult me! I grieve for him as does the rest of his family members who must shudder at such behavior.

Yeah! I've put myself up as an object against which hayoff gets off trying to insult me. Really. The real insult is that he is SO inept at trying to insult me! I grieve for him as does the rest of his family members who must shudder at such behavior.

The total lack of respect and condescending attitude with which Hay treats Marshall , and others, is why I simply refuse to engage in any " conversation" with him.

I know he thinks himself clever......let's just hope for his sake he is a better dancer than he is a conversationalist. For my part I can't imagine anything more unpleasant than dancing with a man who smells of beer.

"For my part I can't imagine anything more unpleasant than dancing with a man who smells of beer."

In many of the places that I dance, you'd never be smelling beer on a partner. If you walk into a bar and want to freshen up your breath, nothing works quite as well as a swig of GOOD beer.

Just recently I had a woman who loves to dance with me say that she doesn't like the smell of beer. Standing there in the midst of 500 people, half of them drinking beer, I asked her if she could smell any trace of beer....Nope.

I think, too, that beer has a bad rap because most of us, in our youth, ended up drinking CHEAP beer that actually does smell bad. Find yourself a nice IPA and you might have a new attitude. One of the qualities of GOOD beer is that it has a wonderful smell.

My local beer store knows I love the wonderful seasonal beer, Aprihops.I got an email from them a couple of weeks ago telling me that they took the liberty of ordering a couple of cases for me. I'm currently in Beer Heaven.

Good beer versus crappy beer.

Here's the reviews from the link above for the smell of Aprihops. Tell me if you think this stinks.

"The nose is tart with apricot and floral with hops. The malt whispers a bit of sugar in your ear and a soft bit of bread. Taste is juicy and sweet. It's a very sweet malt that gives a wonderful medium full mouthfeel. The beer is sticky and leaves behind a bit of that apricot to linger in the aftertaste. I want to say that I also taste some orange and some orange peel. The bitter is well done in this. It's just enough to leave you with a nice IPA feeling from this decadently fruity beer.

S: Lots of citrusy hops. Grapefruit upfront with a bit of some grassiness underneath followed by a nice wave of fresh apricot. A great balance of standard IPA aroma and apricots.

S: Very delicate aromas of apricots, caramel, cream, biscuits, pine, bitter orange, lemon, and grapefruit are present on the nose. This smells surprisingly restrained and subtle for an American IPA.

Lot of pine and fruit in the nose.

Smells of citric hops, caramel malt, apricot, and dark fruit, but over-ripe apricot and malt are the dominant aromas.

Smell: Piney, grassy hops work very well with the apricots ... there may also be a little bit of citrus there, too.

Smell - Blend of mild floral hops and sweeter fruit from the apricot. Some citrus elements as well, like zest or essence.

S - A very sweet smelling IPA. Most likely from the apricots that were used. Apricot and other citrus such as lemon aromas rule this beer.

The aroma is interesting. It has that IPA hoppiness, but also with a sweet sweet fruity apricot background. It’s quite sticky like honey. There’s a slight bit of bitter grapefruit, pineapple that also comes through.

"AWFUL!! TERRIBLE!!! I RATHER NOT DRINK BEER THAN DRINK THIS AND THAT SAYS ALOT!!! TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE!! This and Michelob ranks as worst beers ever. I'm shocked so many people drink this! I cant even think of anything positive except the designs and their marketing campaigns.

Had to bad mouth beer from my home state but I have to. I'd like to consider price vs tastes got "cheap" beers but it's not even that cheap. Little head. Does not go down smooth at all. Could not drink fast. Real light appearance. Hard to drink ice cold, as it warms even worse. Many, MANY beers that I'd suggest from Wisconsin first. The smell honestly makes it hard to drink to.

Nose is the familiar adjunct grains and mild skunkiness. I get corn (syrup?) and barley malts.

This beer is terrible, I will throw it in the same barrel as keystone. I wouldn't imagine that any beer enthusiasts would ever recommend this trash. This beer is made for kids to chug without having to think about taste. I can only hope that craft brewers will continue their uprise so that support of these gross mass produced beers will stop someday.

- Almost non-existent but what little there is consists of adjuncts; no hint of malt or hops.

Light straw color with no head or lacing. Smell? what smell?

In spite of that, I think this is one of the best 'cheap' beers that you can get. I'd much rather take this over a Bud or Coors. Either way, I'm pretty desperate to be drinking this beer in the first place.

Mass-produced swill, but it'll get the job done.

Unpleasant aroma of corn and some bread with butter.

The nose is mild but there are hints of wheat present; it is one of the few AALs that does not smell downright bad. As expected, the flavor is light and thin with a mildly sweet corn flavor. The finish is downright bland - "triple hopped" must mean that they use three hop cones for the whole batch.

I keep a regular stock of this on hand for friends who do not like craft and I thought it was high time to do a full review. As a bonus, this offering is proudly union-made by UAW workers.

Marshall, you have no idea. When you get our winning strategy all figured out, we're going to make so much money that we'll be having to fight off all those beautiful women who love to drink GOOD beer and dance the night away.

I had to do a poll on beer preferences years ago for a part time job I had.

One woman was so crazy about Rolling Rock that the interview was practically a paeon to that beer.

Since I had never cared for beer before that, I tried some Rolling Rock ans found it somewhat better than some others I had tried.

Once or twice a year, usually on a hot day, I find myself in the mood for a beer, but most places don't seem to serve it.

:o(

Do any of you beer affictionatos have recomendations for a
generally accessible beer that would be better than Rolling Rock? I do not like much hops and definitely nothing "skunky" (which someone recently told me is due to beer getting warm after having been cooled).

If civilization is going to go down the tubes I might as well prepare.

"If civilization is going to go down the tubes I might as well prepare."

Now you're talking. Eat, drink and be merry!!!

"Do any of you beer affictionatos have recomendations for a
generally accessible beer that would be better than Rolling Rock? I do not like much hops and definitely nothing "skunky" (which someone recently told me is due to beer getting warm after having been cooled)."

Go to a big beer store that has a large selection of good beer and they'll help you out right there on the spot. Stores like these LOVE to talk about beer. You'll usually not find the really good beers in the supermarket or the corner liquor store.

If you really don't like the hoppy taste, try some of the stouts or the porters or something like that. Avoid the pale ales and the IPA.

You should always be able to find Guinness Stoutif you want the non hoppy malt flavor.

In Pennsylvania, Stoudt produces some very nice beers. I think they also have a very nice restaurant somewhere in the state. Go on a brewery tour and you'll have a chance to sample a lot of beers.

Weyerbacher has some great beers, but the ones I'm familiar with tend to be more extreme: lots of whatever.

One of my all time favorites, from above, is Aprihops, a seasonal beer from Dogfish Head, a brewery in Delaware. It's hoppy, but if you read the above post, you'll see it's very nice. Try it. It should be pretty easy to find.

If you want to read about any beer, do like I did above and google the name of the beer and the words "beer advocate" and you can get into the Beer Advocate site without having to register. Everything you need to know about beers is there.

Although some scientists warn of the possibility that climate change could occur too fast to adapt to, leading to severe adjustments for all of us, it would be unwise for us here to depend on very unlikely collapse to save us from guaranteed unhappy consequences of inaction, and more especially, our children and their children, who will never know the lovely springs and summers we grew up with. Unless we act.

For some strange reason, I have an unexplained desire to have a beer. I don't usually like it, but every once in a while it hits the spot. There's probably one in the deep, dark recesses of the fridge.

"Alas, Hay, I am a teetotaler now for near 25 years. But I'll be there to haul your drunken arse from the frantic clutches of geriatric women besotted with your limitless charms and accomplishments.
Elvis and I...well, just you no mind."

I'm a teetotaler also, but I like gambling and shows, also the countryside around Vegas. We can go to Valley of Fire!

Chocolate: there's a huge M & M's store on the Strip. ;)

I came back from vacation too soon. Global warming isn't working at my place...

I know I give that impression with my Love of Beer talk, but I can count on one hand, (OK, maybe two) the number of times I've been drunk since my youth. I almost never drink more than the healthy two drinks a day. Some days, only one; some days none. I don't want to have to end up a teetotaler like Marshall.

"Hay has clearly seen those apocalyptic films where everyone (excepting the protagonists) is partying away in the face of looming destruction..."

Forget one hand. I haven't been to a movie since Cold Mountain. The only reason I went to that one is that I was half dragged to it and I hiked that mountain many times when I was growing up. You didn't see me on the Greatest Movie thread.

I've said many times, in the face of my growing old... my personal looming destruction.... I plan to party as much as I can. I eat bacon with abandon these days. I plan to smoke a nice cigar on my death bed. The best is yet to come.

I remembered last night that one of the nicest, more COMMONLY found, beers is Sierra Nevada Pale Ale. I've seen it plenty of times in grocery stores.

On Mardi Gras night I was at a place I usually don't go to with a big collection of beers. I had seen a Sierra Nevada Pale Ale on a shelf to indicate their selection, but when I asked for one, the barmaid said they only had Sierra Nevada Torpedo, an India Pale Ale, (IPA) Always wanting to try something new and liking their Pale Ale, I tried it. Very nice. Beer Advocate gives it their absolute highest rating.

IPA's, if you don't know, are India Pale Ales, with extra hops and extra alcohol to help withstand the long journey from England to India back in the days. Hops and alcohol help to keep the skunky bacteria away. The reason for the dark bottles of beer is to keep the light off the hops or else they'll go quicker.

I think maybe a good, general rule for finding a good beer if you don't know any other way, is to trust that, if someone goes to the expense of importing a beer from, say, England or Ireland, it's probably going to be a good beer.

I am ignorant on the subject of alcoholic beverages. When I do drink, it is usually a single shot of good vodka, as cold as possible, either in a martini glass or in one of my pretty German 'pony' crystal etched glasses (have a set of 12, they make a good vase for a single small flower) - a single shot only which I will sip on for a very long time.

Are pony glasses still considered part of a well stocked bar or are they no longer in fashion? These I bought in Germany are taller than a shot glass and narrow, but hold exactly a shot of alcohol, they were bought in the very late 70's.

Once in awhile I'll enjoy a loaded eggnog - that is SO delicious but those calories arent worth it, over 400 calories in a 4 oz cup! I quit having one at Christmas years ago.

A question: I have a half of a tall bottle of Grey Goose in the back of the fridge that is easily four years old and a small bottle of Bacardi rum on the top shelf of my cupboard which is probably even older than the vodka.
Is it time to throw them away or was the person that told me that it will keep pretty much forever, correct?

"Hay, I prefer to hear about your dancing and romancing for my vicarious pleasure as I don't drink beer anymore.."

I'm sorry to hear that so many of you aren't taking advantage of the wonderful health benefits of beer. I think they still believe that a man like me will benefit from drinking up to my healthful two drinks a day.

I have a friend who is always joking that he's going to be saving some of the wine from the end of the bottle for "cooking". In his case he's not going to be adding it to the stew, he's going to be drinking it while he's "cooking".

"Beer Marinade Reduces BBQ Cancer Chemical"

"This summer when I soak bratwursts in stout beer, I’ll say it’s for the health benefits. Beer-bathed pork formed fewer potentially cancerous chemicals than non-marinaded pork when grilled close to hot charcoal in a recent experiment by Portuguese and Spanish chemists.

Black beer, like a stout or porter, proved more effective than pilsners at preventing the formation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), worrisome chemicals formed in smoked and grilled fatty meats."

'Blech... I'll take a good non-bonded drink before I'll sip anything that causes a hangover. Bonded booze is gross in my humble opinion."

I don't think there is any kind of booze guaranteed to not provoke a hangover. "Bonded" simply means: "American-made liquor that has been aged and bottled according to a set of legal regulations contained in the United States government's Standards of Identity for Distilled Spirits, as originally laid out in the Bottled-in-Bond Act of 1897."

That's gross?

_________________

"I'm not a connoisseur and am not too much of a drinker but do enjoy a brandy Manhattan every so often."

That's a far northern thing, Duluth. A bartender in Florida will peg you as from Minnesota, UP, or Wisconsin if you order a brandy Manhattan or brandy old-fashioned. Trivia.

I didn't get the bondied and hangover either. I haven't had a hangover since my youth. I think that's what calmed me down way back then. I know that at some point I just decided that the "fun" just wasn't worth the hangover.

"Hay, you really let me down and ruined my vicarious love life. I will have to look to Marshall to share his..."

When me and Marshall make a lot of money speculating on the gaming tables at Vegas, we'll have plenty of women. You're welcome, along with Steve, to come along. We're going to be having so much fun.

Some "chocolate" beers really do have chocolate in them, but much of the talk about chocolate and beer is because of the flavor from selected malts and the roasting.

And, to be fair, the craft beer makers will try anything and sometimes they're just plain awful tasting. Dogfish Head and its Raison D'Êtrecome to mind. I think they brew this just so they can use the name "Raison D'Être". It's made with raisins.

Aprihops is another cute name and a good beer. "Apri" plays on the fact that it's got Apricots and hits the market in April. The Apricots and the sweet malt and the hops gives it a very tasty Sweet and Bitter taste. Sweet and Sour in a bottle!

"I don't think there is any kind of booze guaranteed to not provoke a hangover."

Yes. There is.

Bonded means approved by the government; legal; hangover city; gross.

I'll drink good old fashioned 'shine or purple lightning... and not that bonded crap they sell as moonshine, which really isn't... before I'll drink anything watered down and approved by a governmental agency, thanks. No hangover involved.

My father once was a partner in an auctioneer business in the Lake George area. At one property in back of a basement room he discovered a wooden case of unlabeled whiskey having the taste of bourbon. The case probably dated back to the Prohibition era or even earlier. The most mellow bourbon I ever drank. The event was the only adult conversation I ever had with my birth father, so that may have made the booze more memorable.

Mmmm, beer (ale)....I insisted Mr Campanula went on a beer diet when his weight crept below 10.5 stone. He was resistant for 5 minutes or so but has enthusiastically gone along with a nightly tipple of a pint (or 2) of some of our rather good micro-brewery ales (an area in which we, the English, surely reign supreme). Clear hoppy golden summer ales, rich dark chocolate porters (although I am not keen on Guinness) some of our bitters have the complexity and depth of the finest single malts.
Then, of course, there are ciders and perries!

I never drink spirits........ and wines just make me feel slumberous and faintly poisoned. I would probably lap up the stagnant saucers in the greenhouse with more enjoyment than having to imbibe a lager (vile, fizzy) or weak yankee rubbish (Coors, Budweiser, Miller....although I hear that the US has 'discovered' Real Ale)

The UK is a small and slightly deluded little island, with a large and unwarranted sense of it's own importance in the world. The last traces of 'Empire' vanished before I was born (thankfully) and our inglorious recent war adventures are more cause for shame than pride......but in one area, we are world champions.....I will, of course, raise a glass to anyone who comes within spitting distance of beating the English brewers at their art....but know I have little to fear - our beery* dominance remains safe and untoppled.

*Obvs, we do NOT consider lagers, pilsners or any of these Continental fizz bombs as ale.

I went through all of my England adventures drinking lagers - seems that's the only thing served cold.

Your beer dominance probably will remain unchallenged, but some local micro-breweries are cropping up that are pretty good. Unlike the most interesting man in the world, I don't know from Dos Equis, so if I have a beer, I tend to go for Leinenkugel's which has a limited distribution mainly in the upper Midwest.

Oh dear, Duluth - then you can surely not have heard the term 'lager lout' (oafish type with little taste or discernment) but will forgive you if you innocently fell for the 'warm beer' accusation thrown at us by nations less endowed with brewing excellence. We are not afraid to dull the taste of our marvellous ales by freezing or fizzing.....but the idea of serving it at anything other than refreshingly cool from a well stocked brick cellar is heresy of the vilest sort.

Whether you consider a sudden enthusiasm for strong beer to be sign of impending collapse or proof that disintegration is proceeding nicely already, is a matter of personal perception....but I for one, am comforted that 1000 years of brewing history implies a certain consistency and stability......so we should continue to remain pleasantly tipsy ......conversely, given the strength (and deliciousness) of some of these ales could mean we may well find that civilisation collapses sooner rather than later ...........but we will, hopefully, be blissfully comatose when the sh*t hits the ventilation unit.

I don't drink alcoholic stuff, but I also appreciate non-cold drinks, even water; must have acquired the taste when I lived in Mexico back in the day. I think there is more taste when drinks are neither very hot nor very cold. Cool is fine. You're making me thirsty, Campanula.

I'll drink to that! And judging by the time of your posting, I can imagine....

There are, for sure, great beers from England, but you'll find beers just as well made in the craft beers of the USA. You don't need to go to England to get really great beers.

Like I said above, if someone goes to the expense of importing a beer from abroad, it's probably good. (Although I think many "foreign" beers are sometimes made locally to the standards of the foreign brewery. I drank Guinness Export Stout in Jamaica. Made in Jamaica. In Kona, Hawaii, if you drink the local Kona Beer from a bottle, it's made in the continental USA and brought to Kona. )

Description:
Light bodied, pale, fizzy lagers made popular by the large macro-breweries (large breweries) of America after prohibition. Low bitterness, thin malts, and moderate alcohol. Focus is less on flavor and more on mass-production and consumption, cutting flavor and sometimes costs with adjunct cereal grains, like rice and corn."

I'm not a drinker... but if I do ever tip a jar, I'd much rather it be good, and clean, with a decent flavor... and I want to know its source, who made it and its quality... and I'd rather feel its effects within a sip or two or three... and not wake up the next day feeling crappy... no thank you on the low actual content and watered down flavors available through American bonded alcohols, the majority of which aren't worth the price tags.

Is society failing to the point it will fall apart? Not by itself... but add in everything else that is failing and there may be something to it.

People like what they like and don't care much about how others rate it.

Kind of reminds me of the hidden label connoisseur wine snob gathering in DC. After all the nosing, swirling, clarity checking, palate attacking, guessing of what fine winery produced this, etc. the near unanimous choice turned out to be - to some embarrassment - some screw top vin ordinaire.

Not my beer site. The reviews are broken down into two sections, One is from people like you and me. One is from the pro's at their precious beer site. Register and tell them how wonderful Old Milwaukee and Leinenkugel actually are.

I find the site very useful. There are other precious beer sites that comment on beer if this one is not to your taste.

"People like what they like and don't care much about how others rate it."

Absolutely.

I was just reading an article about smell and taste. We're genetically hard wired for some of our taste and smell preferences. I can't stand the smell of perfumes. I can't stand the smell of privet.

To each his own. Even if you don't agree, it can't hurt to open your eyes and mouth to something new and different. Unless, of course, that offends your precious taste.

frank, thank you for defending our beloved Old Milwaukee.
That is what is regularly stocked in my fridge as my lawn mowing/gardening break stuff. I prefer the regular to the light.
My son and I enjoy the occasional visit to micro-breweries when he is in town or I'm out there in Cali.
My 1st legal beer was when I was boating with the Navy in SE Asia in '68. That was a Pabst Blue Ribbon.

Hey, I remember drinking Old Milwaukee when living in its namesake. There was a cheaper beer, the name escapes me at the moment, so cheap that it sold for under a buck for 6-pack of cans. The cheap stuff was definitely eau de phew.

I just went back and looked at the review of Leinenkugel's Original that I had posted above. The precious site owners, "THE BROS", didn't even rate the beer. All the poor ratings, 403 of them, came from ordinary beer lovers like me and you.

And your precious Old Milwaukee? The precious "BROS" give it a "very good" rating. The average beer slob like you and me rated it as "poor".

Be bold, Before you decide your beer is the nectar of the gods, try something new.

Marshall, this one below was .89 / 6-pak around here back then. Hammms was another one. A recent good brew I found is called Golden Monkey, smooth , full flavored and not bitter, and only need one at 9%.

Darn it, my favorite beer (before sobriety overcame me) was Henry Weinheart (sp?) out of northern California or PNW, bought out by Coors some years later. Don't know if it is still around, a darker beer than most for the time (late 1980s.)

Marshall, the English hardly consider beer to be alcoholic (although it obviously is) - we were practically weaned on it......unlike those bibulous Frenchies with their winey habits).....by 'drink' we usually mean something akin to vodka, brandy......or even strong cider. Beer is like a cold version of tea - to be drunk whenever a thirst demands. I consider myself more or less tee-total in that I would be giggling (then getting a bit sweary) after a smallish glass of wine, so I don't drink any....but a bottle of Adnam's Broadside is like a cool breeze of goodness - pretty much a meal.

I wonder if the culture of the robust beers of England and mainland Europe, like Germany, is a function of the climate, which never used to get genuinely hot. I'm not a beer afficionado so can't argue fine beers, but out in California a drink with a lighter body, like a (omigod) Budweiser, was refreshing on very hot summer days. Tecate or Dos Equis (long before those stupid commercials) were stronger but still nice.

The heavier lagers just seemed too much, though, and I can't be the only one who found them were less appealing as few people provided them at parties or took them camping on the beach. I occasionally would put a strong beer in a beef dish, and I can see drinking them with a robust meal like that, preferably with a nice fire in the background.

" Aroma and flavor runs along complex, spicy phenolic, powdery yeast, fruity/estery with a sweet finish. Sweetness comes from both the pale malts and the higher alcohol. Bitterness is up there for a beer with such a light body for its strength, but at times is barely perceived amongst the even balance of malts and hops. The lighter body comes from the use of Belgian candy sugar (up to 25% sucrose), which not only lightens the body, but also adds complex alcoholic aromas and flavors. Small amounts of spices are sometimes added as well. "

I was trying to think how to describe how this style of beer comes across to me and I decided that it is to other styles like the Russian Imperial Stouts as champagne is to bourbon. Whatever that conjures up in your mind.

If you like this style, vgkg, keep an eye out for the Canadian beer, La Fin Du Monde.Maybe it's just because I'm close to the border, but I see it quite often.

"LIsten guys, it's been a long day and it's been difficult to think of a cool name for this wonderful beer, but, let's call it a day. We'll come up with a cool name. It's not like it's the end of the world... Ding!!!"

Meanwhile, back in the USA:

"I wonder if the culture of the robust beers of England and mainland Europe, like Germany, is a function of the climate, which never used to get genuinely hot. I'm not a beer afficionado so can't argue fine beers, but out in California a drink with a lighter body, like a (omigod) Budweiser, was refreshing on very hot summer days. "

In the Winter, I eat more oatmeal. In the Summer I might eat
more yogurt and fruit. I think it's a bit like that. In the Winter, I'll drink more of the Russian Imperial Stouts like my favorite,Old Rasputin. In the Summer, I might drink La Fin Du Monde.In the Fall I like some of the Pumpkin Ales, Here it is Spring and Aprihops has arrived. Year round goodness to fit the season.

So many beers, so little time....
Nice site Hay, 90% of the varieties which are not available locally here. Though Golden Money is not at the top of the refinement list it's a good beer at a fair price and one that doesn't give me a headache nor bitter after taste. I'll keep an eye out for La Fin Du Monde, perhaps our Whole Foods on the far side of town stocks it.

No one has noticed this thread has descended from the apocalyptic heights to the lowly level of beer-tasting ?

Beer? Yawn--puts me to sleep. I'm serious--can't even get through one bottle.

In the meantime, sans beer and its attendant sleepiness, yes, I do sometimes worry that global industrial civilisation could collapse in coming decades due to unsustainable resource exploitation and increasingly unequal wealth distribution.

Unfortunately, it is much too large a problem for a lone individual to "fix"--leaves me feeling a bit helpless. (Maybe that is why this thread escaped into what is your favorite beer--lots of choices and being in charge when it comes to selecting beer???)

"Though Golden Money is not at the top of the refinement list it's a good beer at a fair price

When you go to the beer styles at Beer Advocate, the default page lists them according to the number of reviews they've garnered.

In the case of your Tripels, Vgkg's Tripels again, La Fin Du Monde is at the top and the next beer is your Golden Monkey. Which says that a lot of people are drinking both and giving both of them pretty good reviews.

And I'll point out to you that you can change the way the list is ranked by clicking, say, the heading, "rAvg", to get a ranking based on the ratings. Be careful with that since you could get only one review, I guess.

I was thinking a bit about snobs and their beer. It's all relative. If I had been stranded on a island for years, you better believe that an Old Milwaukee would be like a gift from the gods.

But I'm not stranded. If you want to save yourself a lot of money, ignore everything I've said about beer.

Whenever I'm lucky enough to get invited to someone's home for a dinner or a party, instead of the customary bottle of wine, I'll bring beer. Usually a six pack of an assortment that I happen to like at the moment.

That's why God gave us the Russian Imperial Stouts. And drink it room temperature like me and Campanula. I think people might like cold beer because it numbs your taste buds. Drink good tasting beer. The warmer it gets the better it tastes.

I have 5 beers in my refrigerator now. They came from a variety six pack that I (with the help of a very nice young man who worked at the store) picked out at the local beer store. I looked them up on Beer Advocate this morning.

So, I try to like better beer, but the first IPA that I had (the name escapes my mind) was pretty bold flavored. I do not know if my beer palate is sophisticated enough because I did not finish it. I have been afraid of my choices ever since.

I think the dry hopped is just a description of a process. I think that means that they add some of the hops toward the end of beer making, not toward the beginning. I've been reading a lot about beer in the past several days and I think I remember that adding the hops early gives you more of the bitterness and adding it later gives you more of the pleasant aromatics.

"So, I try to like better beer, but the first IPA that I had (the name escapes my mind) was pretty bold flavored. I do not know if my beer palate is sophisticated enough because I did not finish it. I have been afraid of my choices ever since."

So drink more dry hopped? Drink more of the plain ole Pale Ales without the extra hops and alcohol of the India Pale Ales?

I'm not always liking the really hopped up beers, but one thing I've found is that one reason the brewers want you to drink fresh out of the brewery beer is because the hops go pretty quickly. Which means that you can "cellar" or put some in the back of your refrigerator and they mellow out a bit over time.

Well, over here, I'm on Hayseedman's proverbial desert island. I don't expect you'll find this one on any snobs' tasting sites, but I like it. Robust, gutsy, full of grunt. In winter, I have to put it in the fridge to keep it from freezing on the shelf...

" I don't expect you'll find this one on any snobs' tasting sites,..."

What, you don't think beer snobs travel? And you think a traveling beer snob wouldn't seek out a beer no matter where they travel?

Au contraire!!!

Beer Advocate only has one person reviewing it with no comments. Average.

The site, Ratebeer, has 31 reviews. Many seem to use the word "watery" in their description so you might need to take literally, "alcoholic strength not exceeding 8%".

A long time ago I was in Nepal. Around Kathmandu, before my beer craze days, I was drinking some brew that seemed to be whole barley kernels that had been fermented in water. It was brought to my table as a glass of these kernels and you'd sip the liquid through a straw.

And on a trek, up in the hills, a couple of enterprising women had done the same sort of thing with barley that they then distilled using the method of a big pot with an inverted lid looking arrangement and another collecting vessel inside the pot. The inverted lid part was kept cold with water and the pot brew was heated up and then the alcohol would condense on the lid and drop back into the second collecting vessel. I give it five stars.

I know someone that spent some time in prison and he tells me that the other prisoners would steal bread from the kitchen, add water and let it ferment in a hidden part of the ceiling.

I'm pleasantly surprised. As I said, there’s not much choice around here, but “watery" isn't a word that comes to mind with my experience of this beer! Actually I’d suspect it’s somewhere north of the claimed 8%. But then, one could argue that pure vodka or gin are “watery”.

That stuff you describe as trying up in the hills of Nepal is also brewed with exactly the same method here, but only out in the villages. Must be a Himalayan regional thing. It's called “raxi” in Nepal, and "ara" here in Bhutan, and can be made with maize, rice or barley. I like it too, but only in small amounts. Not my idea of a "quaffing" brew to quench a strong thirst on a hot day...real hangover material.

Well, I suppose hangovers could be caused by impurities and/or preservatives and/or some by-products of a fermenting process. Likely a more complicated result than simply over imbibing for each individual.

Don't know - haven't had a hangover since college (i.e., a long time ago). Once or twice was enough of an experience.

It's not the alcohol, itself, that cause hangovers... it's the sugars and other impurities, I believe...

I've drank a good amount of varied types of alcohols in my day... both bonded and otherwise... and the only thing that never delivered any sign of a hangover was a pure moonshine made by a private party.